Author Topic: Hillary LOL (f/k/a Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch f/k/a Hillary 2016?)  (Read 335139 times)

0 Members and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44895
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1175 on: February 04, 2016, 05:06:45 PM »
I've read several posts here regarding Hillary's handling of classified materials as no big deal.

Well, it is a big deal. Military personnel are held to high standards regarding classified materials. The POTUS or a candidate is expected to uphold those same standards.

For those that don't see the problem, talk to your friends that are active duty with twenty or more years especially those holding an O-4 rank or higher. Some of you are too young to have friends that old. Might have to speak to your parent's friends.

Anyhow, I'll vote for Paul in the primary. We'll see beyond that if he makes the ticket.

Offline IPA4Me

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7007
  • El Guapo
    • View Profile
    • Life Advice
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1176 on: February 04, 2016, 05:07:02 PM »
:(

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44895
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1177 on: February 04, 2016, 05:09:57 PM »
I realize I'm kinda being a dick, sorry.

So did you overestimate what you think Hillary did or did you overestimate how you think military people would do it the same spot?

Online michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53786
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1178 on: February 04, 2016, 05:12:01 PM »
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/rice-aides-powell-also-got-classified-info-personal-emails-n511181

posted without comment

I really need to see IPA4ME comment on this, unfortunately I don't think I'll get that wish.

He has said that if they did it, they should be looked into just as Hill is now.  I agree, btw.

He talked this nonsense about how what Hillary did is an affront to military people because of honor and other mythical b.s. and a military person would never do such a thing.

I felt he was implying that a low-level nobody military employee could get away with it. Colin Powell could, but Private Gump can't.

Offline IPA4Me

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7007
  • El Guapo
    • View Profile
    • Life Advice
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1179 on: February 04, 2016, 05:15:18 PM »
Lol. It's all good. Just Internet bbs'n.

I still think the mishandling is important as do many military members. I am friends with several mid to upper level officers (we served together). They are screaming within the community for sanctions. We'll see down the road.

Offline IPA4Me

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7007
  • El Guapo
    • View Profile
    • Life Advice
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1180 on: February 04, 2016, 05:16:23 PM »
And Powell is correct. Most higher ranking government workers and Admiral level officers don't get hammered.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2016, 05:19:50 PM by IPA4Me »

Offline IPA4Me

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7007
  • El Guapo
    • View Profile
    • Life Advice
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1181 on: February 04, 2016, 05:19:24 PM »
Here's an example of higher ups getting a pass.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/01/27/the-admiral-in-charge-of-navy-intelligence-has-not-been-allowed-to-see-military-secrets-for-years/

People that work under him are calling for his transfer or resignation. Nope. Just collecting his check and not doing his job.

Online michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53786
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1182 on: February 04, 2016, 05:29:02 PM »
Here's an example of higher ups getting a pass.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/01/27/the-admiral-in-charge-of-navy-intelligence-has-not-been-allowed-to-see-military-secrets-for-years/

People that work under him are calling for his transfer or resignation. Nope. Just collecting his check and not doing his job.

Again, another article confirming that the people in charge of our "top secret intelligence" are inept buffoons that shouldn't be trusted with top secret intelligence. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are people who can be trusted doing important work, but overall it's a bad system based on fear mongering and government agencies determined to justify their existences.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44895
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1183 on: February 04, 2016, 05:36:04 PM »
Here's an example of higher ups getting a pass.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/01/27/the-admiral-in-charge-of-navy-intelligence-has-not-been-allowed-to-see-military-secrets-for-years/

People that work under him are calling for his transfer or resignation. Nope. Just collecting his check and not doing his job.


Very odd

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1184 on: February 04, 2016, 06:57:36 PM »
Oh I get it. So the new strategy to protect Hill is "eh, plenty of high ranking people do this." That's what we're down to?
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 53336
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1185 on: February 04, 2016, 08:02:49 PM »
Apparently you have to be one of the "blessed" ones to avoid prosecution, prison, public humiliation, demotion and/or termination in these types of deals. 

Hil will just try and stand behind semantics and government minutia to get out of this sticky wicket.   Non anointeds get walked out in handcuffs




Offline star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 64043
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1186 on: February 04, 2016, 08:16:23 PM »
Sticky wicket  :love:
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 53336
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1187 on: February 04, 2016, 08:19:19 PM »
Sticky wicket  :love:

 :lol:  Hillary sign primed and ready for the yard, Lib?


Offline star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 64043
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1188 on: February 04, 2016, 08:22:21 PM »
Just take the compliment dax, rough ridin' weirdo
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1189 on: February 04, 2016, 08:29:55 PM »
Here's an example of higher ups getting a pass.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/01/27/the-admiral-in-charge-of-navy-intelligence-has-not-been-allowed-to-see-military-secrets-for-years/

People that work under him are calling for his transfer or resignation. Nope. Just collecting his check and not doing his job.


Very odd
I hope that guy gets paid for that gif. It's the best!

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 53336
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1190 on: February 04, 2016, 08:31:17 PM »
Just take the compliment dax, rough ridin' weirdo

Watch out, no jokin around with Lib  :frown:

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44895
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1191 on: February 04, 2016, 08:34:25 PM »
She's the worst. I'm saying it now and I'm sticking to this, but I absolutely will not vote for her if she wins the nomination. She's slimier than TRUSTED

Offline wetwillie

  • goEMAW Poster of the WEEK
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 30431
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1192 on: February 04, 2016, 08:48:16 PM »
She's the worst. I'm saying it now and I'm sticking to this, but I absolutely will not vote for her if she wins the nomination. She's slimier than TRUSTED

Another general election vote for Rubio!
When the bullets are flying, that's when I'm at my best

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44895
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1193 on: February 04, 2016, 09:08:49 PM »
She's the worst. I'm saying it now and I'm sticking to this, but I absolutely will not vote for her if she wins the nomination. She's slimier than TRUSTED

Another general election vote for Rubio!

Not so much

Offline renocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5971
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1194 on: February 04, 2016, 09:12:24 PM »
That cnn guy asked MG why did she accept  $600,000 for a wall street speech.  That is more than Bellowing Bernie made in 3 Congressman years. 

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1195 on: February 04, 2016, 11:45:01 PM »
Didnt see the debate. Did the slimy lying felon or the socialist promise more "free" stuff?
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 53336
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1196 on: February 08, 2016, 10:29:47 AM »
Did Maddie aka the butcher of the Balkans actually say women who don't vote for Hil should burn in Hades?

Offline Yard Dog

  • Baller on a Budget
  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2468
  • I am DC Cat
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1197 on: February 08, 2016, 10:53:48 AM »
I think the Colin Powell thing would be a bigger deal if say . . . he was running for the highest office in the United States.

Offline wetwillie

  • goEMAW Poster of the WEEK
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 30431
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1198 on: February 08, 2016, 11:13:22 AM »
I was wrong.  I think the FBI will eventually recommend an indictment and the department of justice will comply.
When the bullets are flying, that's when I'm at my best

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37111
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1199 on: February 08, 2016, 11:22:52 AM »
I think the Colin Powell thing would be a bigger deal if say . . . he was running for the highest office in the United States.

Not really. I'd love to see him prosecuted. No public official should be conducting state business on a private server, but if focusing on mishandling confidential information is what it takes to get change, then that needs to happen.